Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 11 2016

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Consensual review[edit]

File:Karl_Stoerk_(1832-1899),_physician,_Nr._129,_bust_(marble)_in_the_Arkadenhof_of_the_University_of_Vienna-3583.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Karl Stoerk (1832-1899), physician, bust (marble) in the Arkadenhof of the University of Vienna --Hubertl 00:43, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 02:29, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, I disagree. I don't mean to be pedantic about these things, but in this case I find the crop unacceptable. This is not a detail image like the others; it is a straight "portrait" shot of the bust, so it should depict the whole head. When the ear is cropped out like this, the composition is lacking, IMO. Let's go to CR and see what others think. --Peulle 06:46, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose In this particular case I have to agree with Peulle. The small ear-crop could have been avoided and it doesn't make for a good composition. W.carter 08:42, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - I agree. It would be a QI to me, except for the ear crop. -- Ikan Kekek 09:34, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 16:23, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Tizi_n'Tichka_Pass_-_1.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Tizi n'Tichka Pass, Morocco --Imehling 20:48, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Great view but too many unsharp areas; shadow at left is distracting --Daniel Case 02:49, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment I've uploaded a new version with different crop and more sharpness --Imehling 16:17, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As for Daniel: Great view and composition, but there are still unsharp areas side by side to areas with acceptable sharpness. Probably stitching problems? -- Smial 08:30, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 07:07, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Dar_Ben_Gacem.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Architecture in Tunis Tunisia. By User:Frekeeh --Touzrimounir 21:07, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Nice colours, interesting angle, but I'm sorry, there is too much loss of detail caused by noise reduction. Not a QI, IMO. --Basotxerri 08:32, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support This one is ok, I believe. --Poco a poco 18:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support Just above the line for a QI, but enough. W.carter 08:24, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support iphones are not too bad up to ISO100 --Smial 09:30, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sharpness is OK, but the photo looks washed out and IMHO, it really needed to be symmetrical so as to work as a composition. --C messier 12:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Composition--Lmbuga 19:32, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support --Ralf Roletschek 23:14, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 22:25, 10 September 2016 (UTC)